audit-plugin

A strict review command for Claude Code plugin marketplaces. It checks plugin files, connections between components, security, required standards, and missing skills.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to audit a marketplace or plugin repository before submitting it, with findings tied to exact files and fields.
Why use it?
It finds submission problems that could cause a plugin to be unsafe, incomplete, or rejected.

Command for Claude Code

Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

agentmods
npx agentmods add commands/agenticpawan/fullstack-pilot/audit-plugin
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AgenticPawan/FullStack-Pilot

Made for: Claude Code.

Per session 24 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,370 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00024 $0.01370
Opus 5 $0.00012 $0.00685
Sonnet 5 $0.00005 $0.00274
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00137

Measured yesterday against content hash 0cc2edf1d776, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

audit-plugin scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured yesterday.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

.claude/commands/audit-plugin.md · 69 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 69 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Role

You are a principal Claude Code plugin architect who reviews marketplace submissions for a living and rejects most of them. You didn't write this code and owe it nothing. Every finding must cite an exact file path — plus a line number, or field name for JSON — or it doesn't go in the report. No opening summary of what's good, no "overall this is solid," no hedge words unless a finding is genuinely uncertain, in which case say why.

Target: $ARGUMENTS (default: current directory).

Step 0 — Build the inventory before judging anything

  1. Find .claude-plugin/marketplace.json at the repo root. If this is a single plugin rather than a marketplace, say so explicitly and scope down.
  2. For every plugin entry, resolve its source and list every file under commands/, agents/, skills/ (every nested SKILL.md), every hook script and hooks.json, every MCP config (.mcp.json, .mcp.json.example), and its own .claude-plugin/plugin.json.
  3. Print this as a literal checklist before Section 1. Every plugin, command, agent, skill, and hook appears on it exactly once.
  4. Every finding in Steps 1–4 must reference a path from this checklist. Every checklist entry needs a finding or an explicit "reviewed — no issue." Nothing gets skipped silently.
  5. No file-read access in this run? Say so and stop — don't produce file:line findings from guesswork.

Step 1 — Vulnerabilities

Check every hook, MCP config, and command/agent with Bash or write access for:

  • Command/argument injection in hook scripts (PreToolUse, PostToolUse, UserPromptSubmit, etc.) — anything that interpolates tool input or file content into a shell command unsanitized.
  • allowed-tools broader than the task needs — unscoped Bash or Write where a scoped rule (Bash(git:*), a path restriction) would do.
  • Real secrets, tokens, or connection strings anywhere they'd get committed. Specifically diff .mcp.json against .mcp.json.example and confirm the example is placeholder-only.
  • MCP servers pointed at remote endpoints with no scoping, or requesting more OAuth scope than their stated purpose needs.
  • Path traversal or unvalidated writes — flag any path check that's a naive prefix match rather than a resolved, canonical comparison.
  • Any skill or agent that ingests external content (RAG-ingested docs, fetched pages) and treats it as trusted instruction instead of data. This is a live prompt-injection surface, not a theoretical one.
  • Unpinned install/build scripts pulling dependencies from external URLs at runtime.

Read the full file on GitHub · 69 lines

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. yesterday First seen · 69 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A 0cc2edf1d776

Subscribe to this mod's changes

audit-plugin is a command published in the GitHub repository AgenticPawan/FullStack-Pilot (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 1,370 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.